Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

The McCanns...


Chris
 Share

Recommended Posts

Different leaving a kid a few hundred yards away which is no doubt negligent than being complicit in its death.

Negligence in one does not make the other more likely.[/quote

 

Proof positive that they were negligent on more than one occasion, they admitted it. Complicit, who knows. Awful parenting, beyond question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amaral was himself an arguido in relation to his investigation of another case, the disappearance of Joana Cipriano. One day after Madeleine's disappearance, Amaral was made arguido, and a month later he was charged with making a false statement. Four other officers were charged with assault. Eight-year-old Joana had vanished in 2004 from Figueira, seven miles (11 km) from Praia da Luz. Her body was never found, and no murder weapon was identified. Her mother and the mother's brother were convicted of her murder after confessing, but the mother retracted her confession, saying she had been beaten by police. Amaral was not present when the beating is alleged to have taken place, but he was accused of having covered up for others. The other detectives were acquitted. Amaral was convicted of perjury in May 2009 and received an 18-month suspended sentence.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann

 

 

Sounds the reliable type to believe. Rather than two Doctors with no previous or direct evidence against them.

 

 

As I say, I'm not here to change your mind and nothing I write will convince you upon even the smallest of points, so all of this futile.  In short, I'm bored already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I say, I'm not here to change your mind and nothing I write will convince you upon even the smallest of points, so all of this futile.  In short, I'm bored already.

That’s a kop out.

The crux of your argument is that you believe the word of a convicted liar and you have no evidence.

Nothing made up or simple speculation will change my mind you are right. Not because of you personally but because there is no reason to. Sorry if that bores you but accusations of this type are easy to make but a little bit more difficult to back up.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strikes me as an example of this place being hypocritical.

We, me included, are the first to shout and scream at the rags. The scum, the mail etc for the poor standard of journalism. Stereotyping. Right wing xenophobic nonsense, anti single mums etc. All based on no credible knowledge or evidence and simply following the hoards in demonisation of one particular group or individual after another.

 

On here we have a mother and father deemed guilty, without much doubt, on the basis of dodgy evidence, a corrupt ex cops opinion and the fact that they come across and a pair of unpleasant, privileged middle class child neglecting publicity seeking twats.

 

Applause...........Applause...........

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s a kop out.

The crux of your argument is that you believe the word of a convicted liar and you have no evidence.

Nothing made up or simple speculation will change my mind you are right. Not because of you personally but because there is no reason to. Sorry if that bores you but accusations of this type are easy to make but a little bit more difficult to back up.

 

 

ZzzzzzZZZzzzzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is saying otherwise. Does that make them responsible for her death?

I don't remember saying they were mate. Just because they're Doctors means nothing either really, we all make mistakes and are human.

People seem to either condemn or defend them, we may never know what happened, but that baby is gone whatever else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordon Brown had something like 9 conversations with Mr McCann in the days following the 'disappearance'. That's pretty odd. The fact that they have not been charged with neglect is also pretty odd. The references to Maddie in the past tense, the refusal to help the police, it all just stinks.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Please do not cite cadaver dogs. They can smell something relating to death/decay. They cannot identify who it was or when. They would smell the same thing in the vast majority of homes because someone will have died in it. 

I know I personally will not book into a hotel room unless someone has previously died in it.

 

These dogs are a lot more sophisticated in their detection abilities than you are giving them credit for. They have an incredible record or being correct, and yet Kate dismissed them instantly!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...